Late Late Southend United Thread - Page 2

football19 · 14-08-2011, 10:57

I think we are not giving any credit to southend,who player for player,have a better and more experienced team.
They did there homework on Acci and did what Acci did to teams last year.
They worked there socks off,got inbetween Accis lines and caused all kinds of problems,winning most key battles.
Saying that,the stats show,after they dominated the first half,they only had one shot on target.
Miller tried,but his inexperience was exposed by Dickinson,who dominated the ariel battle,pinning him on numerous occasions.He then fell into the trap of trying to gain space by dropping off which creates even more problems.
Now heres the problem!!,the midfield three are too lightweight and not fit enough,getting knocked off the ball to easily and in the first half Gutherie was in the pocket of Coughlan (whos still a great player),and his first touch deserted him.
Joycy was the only player showing for the ball,but his options just disappeared(along with a few players).
Proccy needs to get involved more and wanting the ball.
long and Deano played ok,but it was poor defending by Long for the second goal as he never got in the right position to defend the second ball and volleyed against there man(freak goal),were Deano should have buried the late header from a corner.
All that said,we played poorly against a good side and nearly nicked a point.
PS we desperately need new hungry players in the squad,with fire in there bellies,to had competition for places.
PPS last years team would have beaten them easily

AccyMad · 14-08-2011, 11:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

Why?...what did he allegedly say?

He said that in his opinion Kevin McIntyre should have got motm & that, no disrespect to Nat Taylor but for the sponsors to give it to a lad who'd come on as a sub for twenty minutes was making a mockery of it & if it carries on like that they won't be given the option to choose a motm in future.

smudgie · 14-08-2011, 11:11

I didnt hear it either, but its nothing to do with Coley who the "SPONSORS" yes SPONSORS pick for the MOM is it?!??

cashman · 14-08-2011, 11:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by football19

I think we are not giving any credit to southend,who player for player,have a better and more experienced team.
They did there homework on Acci and did what Acci did to teams last year.
They worked there socks off,got inbetween Accis lines and caused all kinds of problems,winning most key battles.

In a nutshell, pity coley thinks we deserved a point,... well not from were i was standing.

Redraine · 14-08-2011, 11:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by AccyMad

He said that in his opinion Kevin McIntyre should have got motm & that, no disrespect to Nat Taylor but for the sponsors to give it to a lad who'd come on as a sub for twenty minutes was making a mockery of it & if it carries on like that they won't be given the option to choose a motm in future.

How very gracious of him.

Lewi · 14-08-2011, 11:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by AccyMad

He said that in his opinion Kevin McIntyre should have got motm & that, no disrespect to Nat Taylor but for the sponsors to give it to a lad who'd come on as a sub for twenty minutes was making a mockery of it & if it carries on like that they won't be given the option to choose a motm in future.

Unbelievable. McIntyre was poor from where I was on the Clayton End - a 50p head and poor distribution. Mind you, the whole team played ale house football so maybe unfair to single him out. White boots when you play like that in a 4th Division game is a no no though. Thought Taylor fully deserved his MOTM and I'm disappointed in Coleman's quote.

lancsdave · 14-08-2011, 11:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by AccyMad

if it carries on like that they won't be given the option to choose a motm in future.

Bet that went down well with the commercial department

football19 · 14-08-2011, 11:29

Got to disagree with Coley on mc intyre,he gave away a penalty,got sent off,when were still in the game and his only meaningful contribution was a free kick which the keeper held.
Agree with him about Nat Taylor though,who showed a bit of energy and freshness,but how many shots/chances did he create?,and he showed a bit of inexperience on a couple of occasions(when defending),indeed when they broke in the second half he was done for pace!!.Not knocking the lad,but M O M ?,no chance,way behind Long, the keeper,deano and joycy

Wynonie Harris · 14-08-2011, 11:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by AccyMad

He said that in his opinion Kevin McIntyre should have got motm & that, no disrespect to Nat Taylor but for the sponsors to give it to a lad who'd come on as a sub for twenty minutes was making a mockery of it & if it carries on like that they won't be given the option to choose a motm in future.

Absolutely pathetic. In my opinion, Taylor really put in the effort and commitment that was so woefully lacking in many of the others. The fact that he was only on for 20 minutes is a damning indictment of Coley's judgement anyway.

However, it's not down to my opinion or Coley's. It's down to the people who sponsored the match, and who paid money to Stanley for the privilege of doing so. For Coley to threaten to take away the MOTM option because yesterday's sponsors dared to disagree with him is like a spoiled child threatening to take his ball home.

Bet yesterday's sponsors are felling really chuffed about Coley's comments too. I'm sure that'll encourage them to repeat the exercise next season!

lancsdave · 14-08-2011, 11:35

Who were the sponsors ? They didn't have one on Thursday because of a cancellation

cashman · 14-08-2011, 11:38

If he did say that, it is bloody disgraceful, n excersise in how to drive away sponsers.

smudgie · 14-08-2011, 13:03

For the first time ever I think I agree with almost everybody in a thread!

ddevil2006 · 14-08-2011, 13:54

who were the match sponsors yesterday, ther was nothing on the front of the programme nor inside, if i was match sponsor i would be very dissapointed if it was'nt splashed everywere

Dan · 14-08-2011, 15:26

Two factual points I'd like to clear up...

1) Coley said he felt Kevin LONG was deserving of MOTM

2) There were no sponsors for yesterday's game.

Ta!
Dan

cashman · 14-08-2011, 15:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan

Two factual points I'd like to clear up...

1) Coley said he felt Kevin LONG was deserving of MOTM

2) There were no sponsors for yesterday's game.

Ta!
Dan

well please clear up if he said whats alleged as well Dan.